Posted on 02/16/2024 11:07:46 AM PST by Mr. Mojo
A 90-year-old California woman has been fired from her volunteer role at the National Multiple Sclerosis (MS) Society after 60 years because she “did not understand pronouns.”
Fran Itkoff, a longtime advocate for those with MS, lost her husband to the degenerative disease 20 years ago before taking his place as the head of the Long Beach Lakewood MS support group in addition to volunteering for the national organization. During her several decades of selfless work, she has won multiple awards from the nonprofit group.
A bombshell interview with Chaya Raichik from Libs of TikTok exposed the complete miscarriage of justice that Itkoff has gone through after being asked to introduce herself with gender pronouns.
“I was confused. I didn’t know what it was and what it meant,” she said, recalling how she reacted when a group representative asked her to use pronouns in her email signature.
“I had seen it on a couple of letters that had come in after the person’s name. But I didn’t know what it meant,” the elderly woman continued. “So when I finally talked to her, I asked what it meant… And she said that meant they were all inclusive, which didn’t make sense to me.”
According to Itkoff, it sounded like the organization was “labeling for females, not males, if you are just putting in she/her.”
Within days, Itkoff was fired.
An email from National MS Society Community Engagement Manager Kali Kulor accused the veteran volunteer of violating the nonprofit’s “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion” guidelines.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
I really hate people who try to force others to endorse lies.
DEI inclusiveness in action.
Pardon my repost:
When it comes to the topic of sexual harassment the liberal left will shout at the top of their lungs that the only thing that matters is the perception of the person who says the harassment took place.
A person’s perception is then a valid concept both in fact and in law for the liberal left.
Which is why I say that I do not have any “personal pronouns” because pronouns are how other people refer to me based upon their perfectly legitimate perceptions. In general everyone I know refers to me with she/her pronouns.
But why?
It isn’t because I put those pronouns on my every email, my every post on the internet, I don’t use them with my signature, in fact I’ve never told anyone how to refer to me.
They call me a woman and they call me she/her because that’s their perception of me. And isn’t their perception valid both in fact and in law? Who am I to dictate how someone else sees me and interprets what they see?
And what they see and how they interpret what they see is how they select their pronouns for referring to me.
Now if someone referred to me as he/him then they’re not wrong.
That’s right. I utterly refuse to accuse anyone of the fashionable crime of ‘misgendering’ me.
Because if someone perceives me as a man then that’s not their problem, it’s mine. If I don’t want to be perceived as a man then I should take more care that people see me as a woman.
Likewise, if some guy who used to win in the Olympics puts on a dress, has breast implants, and is still built like a male athlete people might not perceive him as a woman. Wise people never will.
Wise people will not lie to themselves and call a man a woman when he is clearly no such thing. They will not call a woman a man when she cuts off her boobs, takes hormones to grow a beard, and ends up looking like Rachel Maddow. That’s just an ugly woman with a beard.
This is my point is to refuse the lie that someone else gets to dictate what you see and how you interpret what you see. They are trying to dictate what you think.
Take back your pronouns for 2024. They’re all YOUR pronouns and YOU own them!
Bake the cake!
Liberalism and political correctness and all this LGBT diversity inclusiveness, apparently is far more important to that organization, than the volunteer work done by this woman over many decades.
How shameful. Yet to the organization, they feel no such shame, because getting pronouns correct overrides everything else.
More proof that there are absolutely no limits to tyranny...
Except death...
Pronoun this-——
https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=9afrC2SXviY
Well. Another charity I look forward to not sending money to. I only of them because a friend has MS. Not that it will make any difference to those worshiping the great lies but they’ll get a nasty note from me explaining why.
Bud Light them and give donations to a better organization.
Since conformity is the only substantiation they can achieve for lies, they will resort to anything to achieve it.
"They call me a woman and they call me she/her because that’s their perception of me. And isn’t their perception valid both in fact and in law? Who am I to dictate how someone else sees me and interprets what they see?[emph. added]"
I'm puzzled by only one thing. You point out with utter clarity that people have a right to perceive us as we appear to them--inasmuch as they're entitled to their own darn thoughts and opinions. It’s not for me to demand that anyone refer to me in a way I choose from some special menu.
But at the same time, in a great many sentences of your wonderful post, you don’t manage to make subject and verb agree. Are you too leery of cultural conflict to say—as we logically must, in the English language–“Someone . . . he . . .” rather than the mathematically-challenged, logically confused, and politically correct, “Someone . . . they . . . “????
Regardless, thank you for posting, and please keep up the good work!
Well at least they didn’t roll her off a cliff in her wheelchair.
“But at the same time, in a great many sentences of your wonderful post, you don’t manage to make subject and verb agree.”
This is actually how my mind works. Which explains why I’ve never had a best selling novel!
But I figure if I get the idea out there then b people like yourself will articulate it to others better than I can. So please do feel free to build on this and call it your own. The message is more important than the messenger.
why do people perceive you as a woman? askn for a fren.
“why do people perceive you as a woman? askn for a fren.”
No idea. Ask them. Like I said how other people perceive me is up to them.
I’m too angry to compose any kind of a coherent reply
This is actually how my mind works. Which explains why I’ve never had a best selling novel!
I can't agree. You're a writer of rare gifts. Your preview here struck me as the introduction to a book of social commentary and entertaining story-telling, rather than a novel. But you might find that for you, it would be easier to spin out a novel-like narrative, during the course of which absurdities and realities on this bizarre sensitivity are explored and exploded. (It could sell a lot of copies in brown paper bags to people who don't want to be caught and canceled.)
Your brilliantly direct articulation of the key concept--that the beholder, not the beheld, is the rightful judge of the beheld's public identity--is the hammer hitting the perfect nail on the head, perfectly. It's invisibly obvious, like the Emperor's nakedness. Most people couldn't have put it into words.
In my note above, I was the one with the error: I got scrambled in my terminology. It's a mismatch, not between subject and verb, but between two pronouns in the same sentence, which the linguistic Stalinists are trying to foist on us normals. Here's an example, using a simple opinion of mine: "Someone who refers to themselves as the sex they aren't is doing something laughable, and should periodically be laughed at."
Okay, translating that bit of word-salad into English--not using the linguistic demands of the Stalinists--one has two options.
1) Using the generic masculine: "Someone who refers to himself as the sex he isn't is doing something laughable. . ." 2) Or referring to such tranny nutcases as a group: "People who refer to themselves as the sex they aren't. . ." etc.
Stalinists spread and enforce intentional bits of ideologically based illiteracy in order to intimidate and undermine the culture, and sanity itself. Then they like to hear the innocent victims trip over themselves in the effort to use the new, "mandatory" way of speaking.
We need to resist and deride their coercive chatter whenever possible.
Thank you for your kind words! You’re quite right that I use the they/themselves convention but for me it’s because I’m blurring singular and plural. Not that I care about woke social strictures.
Now that you’ve pointed this out to me I’ll take more care to avoid this incongruity in the future. I’ll also endeavor to employ masculine and feminine descriptions especially when such things will irritate woketards!
Regards,
If I may ask, could you edit what I wrote to improve the clarity of the message?
Thank you!
Megan
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.